ASWATHY THANKACHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P1 and P2 orders of transfer issued by the respondents. The petitioner, while working as a Junior Assistant and Officer-in-charge of the Supplyco Supermarket at Vaikom, has been transferred and posted as Officer-in-charge at the Mavelistore at Arattukulangara which is admittedly within the Vaikom Municipal limits itself.

(2.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the mother of two children and that the Supermarket wherein she is working is very close to her residence. It is submitted that Ext.P1 order of transfer would make it clear that it is not a part of the general transfer and that the letter of the 4th respondent referred to in Ext.P1 provides that the relief and postings pursuant to general transfers shall not be effected till 01.10.2020. It is therefore, contended that the transfer of the petitioner is vitiated by mala fides. It is submitted that by Ext.P2 dated 01.07.2020, Ext.P1 order has been modified and that a different person has been directed to take charge in place of the petitioner as Officer-in-charge of the Supermarket at Vaikom. It is submitted that Ext.P3 representation has been submitted on 30.06.2020 before the 4th respondent appraising the 4th respondent about the difficulty faced by the petitioner. It is submitted that Ext.P7 is the proceedings referred to Ext.P1 and it directs that transfers of persons holding charge of stock shall be effected only with effect from 01.10.2020 and that Ext.P1 order has been issued in violation of the guidelines issued by the higher Authorities in the matter of transfer. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been transferred to accommodate one Aswathy.P.M, who has rejoined duty after maternity leave. It is submitted that the said person has already been accommodated at the NFSA Vaikom by proceedings dated 21.05.2020 and that the contentions are therefore incorrect.

(3.) A statement has been filed by the respondents in the writ petition as originally filed after the amendment of the writ petition, counter affidavit has also been placed on record by the respondents. It is stated that the petitioner had been working in the Supplyco Supermarket at Vaikom since 01.04.2018. It is stated that though she was transferred in 2019, she was allowed to continue at the Vaikom Supermarket on humanitarian grounds. It is stated that the present transfer is only to the Arattukulangara Mavelistore in the Vaikom Municipality and that the transfer does not cause any inconvenience to the petitioner. It is stated that the Vigilance Officer of the Corporation had conducted an inspection in the Vaikom Supermarket on 21.12.2019 and had found some discrepancies in the stock. It is further stated that there were complaints received against the petitioner from members of the public as well as from the local M.L.A and that this had also prompted the respondents to transfer the petitioner out for the proper administration of the supermarket. It is further submitted that the transfer is not effected as a punitive measure and is only intended for the administrative convenience. It is submitted that Ext.P7 had stayed the relief of Officers pursuant to the general transfers and that the respondents had only transferred the petitioner to a nearby Mavelistore without causing any inconvenience to her, since there would be delay in implementing the general transfers in the Corporation.